A space dedicated to reporting on the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations Initiative. It is my belief that this initiative is to be vehicle used by the New World Order to make war against the saints and those who keep the commandments of God as foretold in Daniel 7:23-26

December 27, 2009

It has been awhile since I've posted and my intent was to post a new YouTube video of a powerpoint presentation. But YouTube has a new policy of only 10-minute uploads. I need to decide how I want to break down a one hour and 10 minute presentation and then I will post it. In the meantime, I am posting a response to a couple of editorials which ran in the Medford paper. I have posted sections of those in the blog comments.

Once again Linda Osolkowski is portraying her political opponents as religious and political extremists by attempting to associate their ideology to that of the Taliban, a regime which governed by blurring the line of church and state. She presents the Iraq war as an exhibit of such extremism. Osolkowski’s revisionism is remarkable. She omits that many democrats voted for the war. Of course their decisions were based upon faulty intelligence reports, the same reports republicans were asked to consider. The intelligence was provided by Britain’s Tony Blair, President Bush’s closest friend and ally. Tony Blair and George Bush are both globalists so it is important to examine their actions through the prism of the global lens, i.e., new age politics.

Once the United States was well into the Iraq war, Blair’s message shifted from regime change to advocacy for the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. Blair called for an alliance for global values to straighten out the “clash about civilizations”. His change of opinion was not sudden for he had long held new age views. Blair had undergone a rebirthing ceremony to become “One” with “Mother Earth”, a.k.a., the goddess Gaia. Both Bush and Blair are on record as Universalists, a doctrine, though hostile to Christianity, has been welcomed into many of the apostate churches. The Universalist value of “we all religions worship the same God but follow different paths” is part of the global value system. Today Blair’s faith foundation is housed at Yale University where he teaches Alliance of Civilizations doctrine. The Bush Administration was also a supporter of the Alliance.

As long as there is religious freedom homosexuality and abortion will be debated as moral issues. But for new age politics expression of those views are considered to be an assault against the new civilizations’ “common value system”. Opposition is portrayed as “hateful” ideologies which lead to violent radicalization. This strategy steps beyond the suppression of legitimate debate for UN counter-terrorism measures labeled dissenters as “strategic terrorists”. Everywhere within “the Strategy” one can find these well-defined goals: set aside the separation of church and state; and, through interfaith dialogue, “use religion to combat religion”. The Nazis are known for their attempts at eliminating confessional divides and converging religion.

While Osolkowski’s portrayal of Christians as extremists reflects the New Age political strategy, it might behoove her to examine her support of the goddess cosmology which openly calls for global genocide. A good starting point would be with the most influential organizations in shaping the global spiritual-political landscape. I refer to Lucis Trust, the United Nations’ spiritual foundation, which intricately ties liberation of the goddess to the “doctrine of the coming one”. The coming one—Maitreya—has a mission: unite humanity with the fallen goddess and in the process fulfill all religions’ messianic expectations. Universalism will have served its role as religions are required to converge into “One”. Maitreya’s opposition-- the resistant form—must be destroyed. As written in the Great Invocation “Let Light and Love and Power and Death fulfil the purpose of the Coming One”. The process of destruction is what the New Age visionaries say is an integral part of “conscious evolution”.

December was a good month for Lucis Trust initiates. They are proclaiming the star which heralds in Maitreya’s arrival appeared over the Norwegian skies. While the press reported this “star” spiral as a failed Russian missile, Theosophists and Gaia hopefuls insist it was one of several spaceships placed around the world. Perhaps immature Pleiadians (the goddess’ keepers) could not wait for their 2012 cosmic party to razzle and dazzle with their props. Some point out that the timing coincides with the mid-2009 World Invocation Day which called upon Maitreya’s arrival and the ushering in of his 1000 year Reich (oops, era of peace, light, and love).

Some world leaders point out that 2010 is the first full year of global governance (which Maitreya is supposed to lead). The country that architected of the Alliance of Civilizations is to preside over the European Union’s rotational presidency during the first semester. Spain has announced it intends to advance existing clearly-defined objectives: replacement of the world’s existing economic system; strengthen the United Nations; and solidify the Alliance of Civilizations’ power. The envisioned economic system is “earth-centric” and requires those participating to recognize “Mother Earth”—the goddess—as creator.

One might be inclined to dismiss this New Age politic because it is so bizarre. Doing so would be a mistake. The Alliance of Civilizations has been incorporated into NATO military doctrine and some of its aspects can be found in U.S. military doctrine. NATO is scheduled to announce a new strategic concept in 2010. I’ve seen an emblem incorporates the EU and NATO flags, a fragmented U.S. flag, and three sixes (the number of initiation which New Age visionaries have been teaching is a requirement for transcendence).

What the Alliance of Civilizations proposes is fascism in its ugliest form. Osolkowski’s ideology reflects much of the same. One could say she has more in common with Bush and Blair than she could have imagined. Then perhaps she may be what I refer to as one the nice New Agers—the uninitiated; the hypnotized—who is just coming to the realization of what is involved with conscious evolution.

With names indicative of peace how could anyone oppose these initiatives?

When I was young I worked for a family who farmed—Harold and Elaine Wells. Harold was a World War II veteran. One year he decided to take Elaine to Europe and travel the places he had been during the War. This meant that the couple would spend some time in East Germany which, then, was part of the communist bloc and divided by the Berlin Wall.

When the couple returned Elaine described to me how she disliked East Germany. They were permitted to see only what their guide allowed. While in a downtown district their guide stopped the group in front of a shop where Elaine saw the most beautiful dress. She said she had to buy it and before the guide could stop her, she had opened the shop door. What she saw was not a store, but a room filled with machinery.

These initiatives are exactly what Elaine saw—nice window dressing and machinery. The machinery, of course, is designed tocombat monotheistic religion. As these initiatives blend and converge, we are certain to find the Alliance of Civilizations to be the core resonating group. The Alliance’s initial planning documents say that UN reform IS the successful implementation of the AoC initiative. The timeframe is to move from preparatory phase into activation mode in September 2009. Speaking before the 64th UN General Assembly Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero said:

"Now we must move a step further. The Alliance of Civilisations, which structures and implements those principles and values in the United Nations, should form part, structurally, of its main organs and at all levels. The moment has come for this General Assembly to approve a Resolution to provide the Alliance of Civilisations with that structural dimension. Spain and Turkey and the Friends of the Alliance will work together so that this Resolution may be endorsed before the end of autumn this year. I am sure that it will contribute highly positively to the task that is being developed by organs such as the Human Rights Council, the Economic and Social Council and, even, the Security Council. The dialogue of civilizations must become the mother tongue of the United Nations."

Make no mistake: this is just a formalizing of what has already taken place. All relevant UN organizations have already made entry points into the Alliance of Civilizations.

This resolution will essentially crown the Alliance queen. I expect in 2010 we will see the gathering together the “collective whole”. This is what the Gnostics refer to as the “world soul” which will become “one” with the earth (the goddess, the divine Sophia) and take her seat as the true bride of Christ. I tend to see her more as Bridezilla, the bride of the antichrist.

“Through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.” – Daniel 8:25

October 15, 2009

The Alliance of Civilizations has never received such high level support from the United States as it is presently enjoying from the Obama administration. Even though the Bush administration’s Secretary of State Condolezza Rice expressed enthusiasm for the Alliance, the level of support appeared somewhat measured.

It is not yet clear to me whether Rice recognized the many problem areas contained within the Alliance of Civilizations’ final report, but the Alliance had complained that it was difficult to advance with such low level representation from the U.S. government. Even so, I have archived materials showing the Bush administration privately endorsed the initiative. But the tide has turned. The Obama administration, being fully aware of the Alliance’s problematic areas such as freedom of speech and religion, welcomes the initiative.

“Now, some claim that the United Nations can best protect the freedom of religion by adopting what is called an “anti-defamation” policy that would restrict the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion. I, obviously, strongly disagree. An individual’s ability to practice their religion should have no bearing on others individuals’ freedom of speech. The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faiths will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions. And these differences should be met with tolerance, not suppression of discourse. And the United States will stand against the idea of defamation of religion in the United Nations General Assembly and the Human Rights Council.”

“President Obama and I are committed to defending the Freedom of Expression on the new terrain of the 21st century…Similarly, we wish to stand firmly on the side of the freedom of religion.”

Normally Clinton’s words are ones I would have applauded, but I cannot in light of President Obama’s subsequent

co-authorship of a resolutionbefore the Human Rights Council. This resolution containssimilar language as that used in the anti-defamation resolutionswhich are intended to curtail free speech. The strategy all along has been to convince people that they are operating within the framework of Human Rights. As such, a person’s words that might offend or insult another might be construed as a violation of another’s Human Rights. The Responsibility to Protect initiative indicates clear guidelines are to be posed in public places so civil society understands the expectations placed upon them.

Clinton’s speech appears disingenuous. Being aware of the Alliance’s major problem areas, why welcome the initiative at all? It’s like inviting a group of thugs to a formal dinner and as they are being seated they are given one caveat: their salad forks have been removed. Even though they have one less instrument there is no complaint as they proceed and reach for their dinner fork.

Hillary Clinton surely must be aware that Britain is an Alliance of Civilizations implementation partner. In the interest of protecting free speech she has received a high profile appeal from radio talk show host Dr. Michael Savagewho has requested her assistance to get his name removed from the “Banned from Britain” list for voicing dissenting, “extremist” political views. To my knowledge Clinton has done nothing to intercede on behalf of Michael Savage and, by extension, free speech.

When the Michael Savage story broke Constance Cumbey and I warned today Michael Savage—tomorrow any one of us. Tomorrow has arrived. Today we see that Christiantelevangelist Benny Hinn has been banned from Britainfor having “extremist” views. Britain appears to be implementing the Alliance of Civilizations “shared security” doctrine and is starting by isolating foreign “extremists”. The next step is to look internally. Some British government officials are already calling for population reduction to one-half of its present level. The British people had to combat Nazi ideology during the second world war--today those adopting this same ideology are setting Britain’s policy.

The Alliance of Civilizations has been a master of double speech. They support national sovereignty—redefined; freedom of speech—with restrictions; freedom of religion—with guidelines. It appears that British and U.S. heads of state have mastered the same. Clinton’s tough words appear to be an attempt to publicly placate the Alliance’s critics.

September 21, 2009

From time to time I encounter people who attempt to build the case that Nazi doctrine was rooted in Christianity. Even in the small community of Medford, I've publicly debated this with a new ager. I have never read anything in the Bible which would support the notion that a super human race is going to consciously evolve. I have read the new age literature which twists the Bible to make this case. Conscience evolution was a core belief of the Nazis. Robert Jay Lifton, author of The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide, writes:

“Part of the cure is the experience of transcendence: of a psychic state so intense that time and death disappear. The cure must maintain, or at least evoke periodically, that psychic experience. One’s own sense of transcendence merges with the image of the endless life of one’s people. In that experience—or promise—of ecstasy, one may be ready to kill, or at least to sanction killing.”

Transcendence--or conscious evolution--is also a new age doctrine. There are variations of how the "new species" is labeled, fromhomo noeticustohomo universalis, but this is the same coin, different sides.

The other day as I visited You Tube, a link on extremism caught my attention. The link disappeared as quickly as it had appeared but I fortunately had time to click on it. The link was from theCedar Institutededicated to the intolerance of intolerance. The site is typical new age. Same agenda, different address. I did notice a cartoon which made me decide to give this site additional attention. The cartoon perfectly illustrates the Lucis Trust teaching theSealing of the Door Where Evil Dwells.

This organization is clearly attempting to incite hatred towards monotheistic religion and also place the blame of Nazism on Christianity. The site deserved additional attention. I was able to identify the site's registration through the internet tool WhoIs. It belongs to Lloyd Bokman.

It turns out that Lloyd Bokman is a higher education trainer for FEMA. Note the address on WhoIs and FEMA's site.

So I conclude and direct the Cedar Institute's attention to true extremism: those calling for the "activation" of conscious evolution. TheWorld Commission on Global Consciousness and Spiritualityis stacked with heavy-hitting commissioners who follow ablueprint for the future “activation” of the evolutionary process. The average reader will most likely find the blueprint bizarre and not understandable. I suspect it was purposely written that way to avoid public scrutiny. They have a stupid notion that we cannot understand what they are saying. The blueprint is classic Barbara Marx Hubbard style, so to help explain it I have put up excerpts from the Book of Co-Creation.

“Those who induced Germany to embrace the swastika are not dead. They are still among us, just as they have been in every era, and doubtless will continue to be until the Apocalypse. National Socialism was for them but a means, and Hitler was but an instrument. The undertaking failed. What they are now trying to do is to revive the myth using other means.” - The Occult and the Third Reich, Jean-Michel Angebert

July 25, 2009

One goal of the Alliance of Civilizations is to create a journalist review board which requires reporters covering cross cultural issues be board accredited. Of course op-ed pieces will be distributed by the Alliance for reporters' consideration in covering a story. As I was looking at the Alliance of Civilizations'Global Expert Finder when I found this blog post from the Atlas Shrugs which is linked to my blog. I do have some differences of opinion with the author of this article. One difference is that I do not believe the Alliance of Civilizations is an arm of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. I believe the Alliance is an arm of the European Union--the globalization of the Barcelona Process--which has been lent to the Organization of the Islamic Conference until such a time that Western freedom has been subdued. It was the EU's High Representative Javier Solana who initially called for restrictions on free speech where religious criticism is concerned. Overall, the article is very good. I borrow from and once again give credit to the blog Atlas Shrugs.

Islam is unique in that it is the only religion with a propaganda arm. No other religion advocates for propaganda, deception and disinformation. It is a powerful weapon in their war on the enemy (non-Muslims).

The media is indispensable in this aspect of Islam's war on the West (education is too, of course). Sophisticated and well packaged, Islamic objectives are served well. The assault is global and national. And pretenses are being dropped. Al Jazeera (the English version) is now being live streamed to our intelligence and State departments. It is the worst kind of bias, but every employee can livestream it.

The United Nations' Alliance of Civilizations recently revamped and relaunched theGlobal Expert Finder(GEF), a searchable database of commentators, analysts and academics who have expertise in many topics, including politics, law, education, women's rights, human rights, terrorism, globalization, religion, and art.IJNet recently interviewedthe UN's Daanish Masood about GEF and how journalists can benefit from the service.

Daanish Masood is currently Executive Coordinator at ASMA Society, a non-profit religious and educational organization dedicated to building bridges between the American public and American Muslims through culture, arts, academia and current affairs. Previously, Daanish worked as Outreach Coordinator for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee where he developed a program to increase civil rights awareness in New York's Arab and South Asian immigrant communities. Over the last few months, he has been dedicated to organizing and developing programmatic content for the Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow forum. Daanish's main interest is in the political economy and economic anthropology of the Middle East and South Asia, particularly the issues of foreign labor in the Gulf region. He wrote his undergraduate thesis on the Saudi government's Saudization program, and hopes to pursue a doctoral degree in this area in the near future. Daanish graduated New York University with honors in Analytic Philosophy and Middle Eastern Studies. His language skills include: Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, and Hebrew. Born and raised in Saudi Arabia to Lukhnavi parents, he has been living in New York for the past eight years.

“Restore Trust, Rebuild Bridges”, a cluster of Euro-Mediterranean projects, led by the Alliance and the Anna Lindh Foundation, to be developed by a number of partners, aimed at restoring trust and rebuilding bridges in that region in the wake of the Gaza crisis.

The president’s speech is similar to many such declarations by European leaders. The question it raises is how much the West is ready to forgo truth and its basic principles in its supplication for obtaining peace with Islam. Clearly, the full Islamization of the West is the quickest way to obtain it. Obama’s political program in connection with the Alliance of Civilizations conforms to an OIC strategy that has already been accepted by the EU. In history, this policy has a name: the dhimmitude syndrome.

And President Barack Hussein Obama is fully on board: UN High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations Jorge Sampaio "welcomed the bold vision set forth by the American President to inaugurate a new era of peace and cooperation between the "Muslim world" and the West based on mutual respect, trust and partnership."

"From the Alliance of Civilizations' perspective, this approach provides a strong framework, not only for advancing Muslim-Western relations, but also for engagement between diverse communities and cultures around the world. It constitutes our best hope to turn tides of mistrust that have beset us in past decades and forge a new beginning.

"President Obama's speech provides a clear path for constructive engagement with the Muslim world, a path that doesn't attempt to paste over differences, but builds on common aspirations. Most importantly, he emphasizes the need to address the various sources of tensions - including violent extremism and the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians - and join forces to confront them.

Back to the propaganda article:

The database currently has 120 experts but expects to include around 300 in the next year. Most of the sources speak English, but many are bilingual and can speak with journalists in multiple languages.

In times of a crisis or important breaking global news, GEF also sends media alerts directly to a subscribed list of journalists, containing brief biographies and contact details for experts able to comment on the topic.

Propaganda is taqiya, lies to advance Islam. Like this from their June 29th meeting:

'U(nderstanding) + R(espect) = U(nited) S(takeholders) for Good Governance of Cultural Diversity, Education for Social Cohesion, Respect and Peace,'

This evening I have been invited to be a guest on Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Conservatism to discuss the Alliance of Civilizations with hosts Babe Huggett and Warner Todd Huston. The program info is below. This broadcast starts an hour after Constance Cumbey's My Perspective broadcast. Hope you can join.

July 8, 2009

I am writing this blog post to acknowledge several of the emails regarding Bjorn (Farmer) and present my position on the controversy surrounding his Blue God Star blog. Portions of this may be hard for some to read, but it has to be said so one can understand how I have arrived at my conclusions.

Late Friday evening as I checked my e-mail, I found a message waiting which contained a link to a blog called theBlue God Star. The email indicated that it was Farmer’s new blog. As I read, my initial thoughts were that this is not Farmer’s blog, but then the author identified himself as Farmer. I decided to look at the various posters and found one namedArrowsmith. Arrowsmith writes a blog called theBlack Dog Star. There I became even more stunned to find not even subtle Satanism and supportive posts by Farmer under various screen names of Bjorn (farmer); Freiberg; and Far More.

Some have characterized Constance Cumbey’s latest post exposing Farmer’s writings as a witch hunt. I do not see it that way. Farmer’s post ended with the words “stay tuned for…far more”. He fully intended to continue writing.

I find it reasonable that Constance Cumbey, an accredited author who has dedicated 30 years of her career combating the new age, would react as she did. After all, a person whom she trusted and one whom she linked her web site to recently launched a blog which honored Shiva. Constance had more than adequate reason to act as she did. I would have done the same.

I said on Constance’s blog that if attention were brought to Bjorn which was different in nature, one related to sin other than following a different god, Bjorn’s integrity as a anti new-age researcher would not have been compromised. As of last Friday night, I honestly do not know for which side Bjorn is a watchman.

I have decided to read much of Bjorn’s academic material in hopes of ascertaining what he really believes. This is not a witch hunt. I will let the evidence guide my conclusions. We cannot be compromised in ways our readers don’t know what we believe.

Bjorn, I hope you understand why I have taken this position. I say these things not to embarrass you. This is a very hard truth to say to you as I don’t want you to run away from Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. I still care about you very much and hope and pray that we will be able to forget this and celebrate together at the Lord’s table.

June 17, 2009

"Their script is now written, subject only to last-minute editing and stage directions. The stage itself, albeit as yet in darkness, is almost ready. Down in the pit, the subterranean orchestra is already tuning up. The last-minute, walk-on parts are even now being filled. Most of the main actors, one suspects, have already taken up their roles. Soon it will be time for them to come on stage, ready for the curtain to rise. The time for action will have come." - Peter Lemesurier,The Armageddon Script

"No more delays. No more reports. No more meetings to agree on what has been agreed upon for years...It is time for action." - Federico Mayor Zaragoza,Alliance of Civilizations

May 19, 2009

From its earliest stages, the Alliance of Civilizations initiative found itself an ally named Britain. Tony Blair,reportedly a new ager, gifted the Alliance withBritain’s approvalbefore the initiative had even launched. The spontaneous cartoon crisisyielded further British endorsement when Charles, Prince of Wales, called for the “at-one-ment” of all the world’s faiths through adoption the Alliance of Civilizations and Interfaith Reconciliation. “At-one-ment” is a new age doctrine said to join together individuals attuned to a collective global consciousness whereby religious and political ideologies which cause separation are to be set aside in favor of a common value system. This common set of values is to become the foundation upon which the new civilization is built. The Alliance of Civilizations is one such interfaith initiativeresponsible for defining that common value system. The difference between the Alliance and other interfaith efforts is that the Alliance has been incorporated into military strategy thus giving it lion’s teeth. The Alliance has set forth to establish a global conscience which UN signatory nations are to adopt in implementation of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. The Alliance has focused a great deal of effort attempting tounifying Islam with the Westby heaping heavy scorn upon the West while praising Muslim nations for their contributions to modern civilization.

“…Palestine should no longer be called the Holy Land; its sacred places are only the passing relics of three dead and gone religions. The spirit has gone out of the old faiths and the true spiritual light is transferring itself into a new form which will manifest on earth eventually as the new world religion. To this form all that is true and right and good in the old forms will contribute, for the forces of right will withdraw that good, and incorporate it in the new form. Judaism is old, obsolete and separative and has no true message for the spiritually-minded which cannot be better given by the newer faiths; the Moslem faith has served its purpose and all true Moslems await the coming of the Imam Mahdi who will lead them to light and to spiritual victory; the Christian faith also has served its purpose; its Founder seeks to bring a new Gospel and a new message that will enlighten all men everywhere…”

Michael Savage is known for his conservative views and his opposition to global governance, communist ideology, illegal immigration, homosexual behavior, etc. Savage is a defender of national sovereignty. Overall, Michael Savage does not appear to share the Alliance of Civilizations values system and world view. Savage’s ideology is one which the Alliance considers exclusionary; intolerant; and violently radicalizing.

As I read Smith’s statements why she banned Michael Savage from Britain, I couldn’t help but notice the identities in her language and the corresponding Alliance of Civilizations’Terms of Reference. According to Alliance, “to guide this initiative, the Secretary-General, in consultation with the co-sponsors, has established a High-level Group of eminent persons with the following objectives:

To provide an assessment of new and emerging threats to international peace and security in particular the political, social and religious forces that foment extremism;

To identify collective actions, at both the institutional and civil society levels, to address these trends;

To recommend a practicable programme of action for States, international organizations and civil society aimed at promoting harmony among societies.”

“Toward this end, the High-level Group will consider practical strategies:

To strengthen mutual understanding, respect andshared values among different peoples, cultures and civilizations;

To counter the influence of groups fomenting extremism and the exclusion of others who do not share their worldviews;

To counter the threat to world peace and stability posed by extremism;

To foster awareness in all societies that security is indivisible and is a vital need for all, and that global cooperation is an indispensable prerequisite for security, stability and development.

As I read Smith’s rationale for naming Savage amongst terrorists, I began to suspect she had applied Alliance of Civilizations’ guidelines which guided her to the conclusion he is a terrorist. According to Smith:

"I think it's important that people understand the sorts of values and sorts of standards that we have here the fact that it's a privilege to come and the sort of things that mean you won't be welcome in this country,"

"Coming to this country is a privilege. If you can't live by the rules that we live by, the standards and values that we live by, we should exclude you from this country and, what's more, now we will make public those people that we have excluded.

"This is someone who has fallen into the category of fomenting hatred, of such extreme views and expressing them in such a way that it is actually likely to cause inter-community tension or even violence if that person were allowed into the country”

"If people have so clearly overstepped the mark in terms of the way not just that they are talking but the sort of attitudes that they are expressing to the extent that we think that this is likely to cause or have the potential to cause violence or inter-community tension in this country, then actually I think the right thing is not to let them into the country in the first place. Not to open the stable door then try to close it later," Ms Smith said.

What about individuals presently living in Britain who violate these shared values? It may be worth taking a second look at Gordon

Michael Savage has raised an excellent question:how did his name reach the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith’s desk? For now, I can only speculate. Yet as I look at people and organizations I believe may share an interest in seeing Michael Savage disappear from the air waves, one common connection keeps coming up. That is the Alliance of Civilizations.

United States Department of Homeland SecurityMichael Savage has named Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in alawsuitcharging her with violation of Americans’ civil rights by subjecting them to unfavorable treatment based upon their political ideologies. Under the Bush Administration the United States privately supported the Alliance of Civilizations yet sent no high-level representation to AoC forums. President Obama’s has changed the tone by personally attending a dinner where he was expected to speak at the Second Alliance of Civilizations Forum. The Alliance of Civilizations’ doctrines are already noticeable in U.S. counter-terrorism materials.

Council of American-Islamic RelationsThe Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is an organization which has pursued interfaith dialogue as a means to resolve the clash among civilizations. Some of CAIR’s speakers favor Sufism and present it as the more peaceful aspect of Islam. Citations from CAIR’s material can be found in Alliance of Civilizations’ reports. The CAIR-Alliance relationship is most noticeable in its associations withShaykhHamzaYusufand Alliance High Level Group membersMohammad KhatamiandJohn Esposito. CAIR is a signatory of aCommon Wordwhich interconnects with Religions for Peace and the Alliance of Civilizations initiatives.

In the upcoming days, we will hopefully learn of Jacqui Smith’s decision-making process to include Savage on Britain’s terrorist list. Regardless of how it happened, we are witnessing a fore shadow of what we might expect from the Alliance of Civilizations’ global conscience, global counter-terrorism efforts. Michael Savage is among the first to find himself within the Alliance of Civilizations’ domain which it has claimed for itself. Savage is a major media personality standing at the intersection of politics and religion.

May 3, 2009

The Second Forum of Alliance of Civilizations has passed and the American media coverage has amounted to little more thandid or did not Obama attend the Forum?One might have expected better media coverage with questions ranging from what is the Alliance of Civilizations to what is United States’ interest in this initiative. Instead, the media expressed confusion despite Turkey’s Foreign Ministry had publishedPresident Obama’s itineraryon its web site. The itinerary shows President Obama was expected to give a speech at the forum.

Heritage Foundation writer Brett Schaefer contacted both the White House and the Alliance of Civilizations seeking confirmation that the President would indeed address the conference. The White House said it simply did not know. The Alliance responded it would neither confirm nor deny the President’s attendance. If what the Alliance has planned for us is such a good thing, why not be more forthcoming? Why does the media neglect to give this coverage? In Hitler’s Germany, a resistance group known as the White Rose wrote in theirfirst pamphlet:

"Nothing is so unworthy of a civilized nation as allowing itself to be governed without opposition by an irresponsible clique that has yielded to base instinct. It is certain that today every honest German is ashamed of his government…by means of gradual, treacherous, systematic abuse, the system has put every man into a spiritual prison. Only now, finding himself lying in fetters, has he become aware of his fate."

This eerily describes present day governments whose politicians have eroded them giving favor to global governance, doesn’t it? These days, I believe the media is contributing to similar treacherous, systematic abuse. Yet, along with the rest of us, the media, too, shall soon learn of its fate. What a shock it should be as they learn they assisted in sealing it.

This September the UN General Assembly will vote whether the Alliance of Civilizations initiative moves from that of preparatory to activation stage. The Alliance openly calls for tight controls on free speech. A Media Rapid Response force has been established to provide newspapers and television stations reporting “guidelines” during times of crisis, particularly in the area of where politics and religion intersect. Given the system of global governance intends to unify religion and the state rather than maintain separation, everything now falls within this intersection. To ensure that media coverage adheres to a code of conduct, the Alliance of Civilizations has called for journalistic accreditation as well as a review board which will monitor news coverage. The Alliance, to show it upholds the principles of a free press, says that the he media will be “self-regulating” although it acknowledges that “regulation is not possible without pressure to bear”.

“…the Alliance in 2005 set up a secretariat in New York, and enlisted a founding panel of 20 "eminent persons" to further shape its agenda. This group, heavy on eminences from Islamic states, included Iran's Khatami--proposer of the original Dialogue. ..And in the four years since it morphed into existence as the latest phase of the Iranian-sponsored Dialogue, the Alliance has become another megaphone for some of the U.N.'s most troubling campaigns. In deference to Islamic anti-blasphemy laws, the Alliance favors a global gag on free speech. ....”

Among the latest attacks on free speech include theresolution to combat defamation of religionwhich was voted on by Human Rights Council last March (analysis here). This defamation of religions framework has its way of appearing throughout the interlocking UN initiatives. The Alliance of Civilizations is committed to making it a high priority.

April 15, 2009

The cat was let out of the bag this week as Americans received a dose of reality fromUnited States Department of Homeland Security Report on Rightwing Extremism.I found no surprises in the report. This is what I have been writing of for quite some time. For those new to this blog, the DHS strategy is consistent with the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy in which you will find the Alliance of Civilizations as the centerpiece. Below are links to the counter-terrorism pieces I published earlier:

Who are the targets of the Department of Homeland Security? It is none other than individuals who politically dissent and/or who believe in an “end of days” theology. Imagine that. I find it incredible that the people in these counter-terrorism positions are shocked that one might believe in an “end of days” scenario. Karen Armstrong, for example, bitter over her life in a convent seeks to incite hatred against Christians by leveling false charges of anti-Semitism and accusations that Christians oppose democracy. It’s quite an absurd notion that Christians would oppose a form of government that permits religious freedom. It’s the Alliance’s form of democracy—a safe democracy—which Christians oppose as its intent is to unify the state and religion into one cohesive unit. No more separation of church and state there. One might look at Barbara Marx Hubbard who presented herCitizens Solutions Councils to be incorporated into the Office of the Presidency.Hubbard’s writings are terroristic in nature as they intend to incite violence against the “egocentric” one half of the world’s population and advocates destruction of this “defective seed” from the social body. But let’s not go overboard here, that couldn’t possibly be reason for concern.

Janet Napolitano stands behind the content of the Department’s report. Let’s look a bit further at who is on the list of political enemies or those prone to violent radicalization:

Individuals concerned with Second Amendment rights (right to bear arms);

Veterans;

Individuals critical of the first black president’s policies;

Individuals concerned with single issues such as abortion, gay marriage, etc.

Individuals who believe the old conspiracy theories of the ‘90s—that a “New World Order” would emerge following an economic crisis; etc. etc.

Wait! I fit several of those categories. But I’m starting to feel a little more at ease that I may be able to remove myself from the conspiracy theory category. It looks like I might be able to banish it back into the ‘90s and start to relax in the peace and security of these present moments. But first I need to verify, one can’t be too careful. So I decided to search various web sites for “global governance”. The world body of the United Nations might be a good starting point in seeking that comfort. Hmm, no comfort there: 1,710 documents found containing the words global governance and 410 containing new world order.

Disappointed, I decided to travel down the electronic boulevard to the Brookings Institute because I know they are in “the know”. No comfort there either—2,140 documents related to global governance. And they’re more concerned about securing the world than the Department of Homeland Security. Don't you just really feel secure knowing these people are securing the world?

By now I’m feeling let down. Perhaps Janet Napolitano is plain incompetent. Well, at least she’s confidently incompetent. But heck, maybe the United Nations and the Brookings Institute are conspiracy theorists too, so she deserves maybe one final chance. I decided to head over to the electronic Main Street of Amazon dot com. There I found 6,561 publications on global governance. Sorry Janet, you don't know what you're talking about on this one.

Yet the major news media in the United States reports the visit to be a roundtable discussion with students. SeeFox, NBC, andABCnews coverage.Forbes Onlineis the only U.S. media giving the Istanbul Conference the accurate coverage it deserves--good work Forbes! It looks as though the big three are merelyreporting what the White House has provided.

It appears as though the White House wants to keep a low profile within the United States where the Alliance of Civilizations is concerned. President Obama may be having a roundtable with students, but I expect his audience will look more like this.

March 29, 2009

A recentEuropean Union Parliamentary press releasecalled for President Obama to politically and economically integrate the United States with the European Union. The measures would create two councils: the Political Council, charged with setting a common foreign security policy; and the Economic Council overseeing unification of the markets. I expect integration would also include changes in citizenship based upon the EU Citizens Programme guidelines. The programme creates a global citizen, or an EU citizenship which is “open to the world”.

Expected to preside over the Political Council would be EU High Representative for Common Foreign Security Policy, a position presently held by Javier Solana. The role of the U.S. Congress would be that of “making proposals” rendering it as powerless as the European Parliament. Should this integration take place, global governance stakeholders will have achieved what Alliance of Civilizations’ Giandomenico Picco called for at the 2005 Madrid Counter-Terrorism Conference—a “Safe Democracy”—one in which national parliaments no longer are the “monopolist voice of the people”. Bear in mind that the UN Alliance of Civilizations initiative is the globalization of Solana’s social cohesion policies.

The press release also called upon the U.S. to ratify and accede to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Ratification would subject American citizens to prosecution by the world court for human rights violations. Stakeholders in the global governance apparatus openly tell us what they consider to be human rights violations: political dissent; monotheistic religious belief or belief systems not condusive to sustainable development; separatist or divisive thought; etc. Anything identified as interfering with the “common humanity’s” joining into a “collective whole” has been declared to be an “enemy of the civilization”. For example:

“UNESCO promotes respect for all dimensions of cultural diversity since it is the very fabric of humankind and the “common heritage of humanity”, as stipulated in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity…the Declaration is dedicated to preventing segregation and fundamentalism which, in the name of cultural differences, could sanctify those differences and in doing so, counter the message of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As we can read…No one may invoke cultural diversity to infringe upon human rights guaranteed by international law, nor to limit their scope.” – Rosa Guerreiro, UNESCOWhy terrorism? Strasbourg April 25-27, 2007

“Religion as a social force can be harnessed to build bridges or manipulate to erect walls. How religion functions in society depends upon a number of factors, among them, the political, economic, and cultural environment in which the particular religion operates. Justice, love and compassion – values that are highly cherished in any religion…Since these values are universal, religion, which serves as a conduit for them, should also be preached and practised in a genuinely universal manner. This is what one expects the practitioners of religions to do in the coming century to counter the challenge of globalization. They should discard the narrow, exclusive concept of religion, which often confines virtue and goodness to one’s own kind. Justice and compassion in this exclusive approach seldom transcend one’s own religious boundaries. We should eliminate forever such religious exclusivists.” – Dr. Abduljalil Sajid,The Role of Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue in Fighting Terrorism, Extremism, and Intolerance and Resolving Conflicts; Organization for Security and Cooperation of Europe.

The New Order has been guaranteed Rome Statute governance powers even in nations that do not ratify the statute. The UN initiative calledResponsibility to Protect, orR2P, redefines nations’ sovereignties as shifting “from sovereignty as control to sovereignty as responsibility”. A nation, under the R2P framework, is subject to military intervention should it be unwilling or unable to prosecute individuals who violate international human rights laws. The rationale is that R2P’s function is to protect the human rights of the global citizen (“we the peoples of the United Nations”) which gives it the right to suspend an uncooperative nation’s sovereignty. The UN has gained support for R2P by presenting the case that it needs a mechanism to stop and prevent crimes such as genocide, an objective which is difficult to argue. It is the underlying pieces that pose the problem. The United Nations has built a case in which it has declared half of the world’s population to be terrorists. What is it that they intend to do with this population? In the interest of counter-terrorism measures, could the crime of genocide committed by the UN's hand be considered just? Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has said the intent is to redesign the internet and use it as a weapon against "terrorists". He also said measures would be taken to remove "terrorists" from the world’s financial system.

EU-US integration is not new. Military integration already has taken place and is recognizable in the form of the 2003 Berlin-Plus Agreement. This agreement ensures the transfer of American assets to the EU’s Political Security Committee—a committee presided over by Solana—should it be needed for crisis management. Solana interprets this to include American service personnel.

I suspect, based upon the past and present behavior of the United States, that our leadership plans to pursue integration to avoid becoming a failed state. R2P characterizes an economically collapsed nation as a sem-failed state. A failed state is where degredation occurs to the point a government is no longer able to control the population within its borders. Last year while the banks were announcing failure, Bush Administration Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced integration of 20,000 Rapid Reaction Forcesinto every major U.S. city would be forthcoming.Gates’ has continued his role as Defense Secretaryunder the Obama Administration. These Rapid Reaction Forces appear very similar to Solana’s Headline Goal Battlegroups. Already, within the United States, there are signs that UN’s Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy language is now being incorporated in counter-terrorism training materials. Missouri law enforcement counter-terrorism training materials have emergedindicating that the police should look for signs such as third-party political bumper stickers, political dissent, etc. in identification of terrorist suspects.

I can think of many reasons why we should not integrate, but those who have already experienced intregration pains best tell the story. Consider EU rotational President Vaclav Klaus' warnings that the European Union’s governance structures resemble that of former Soviet-era dictatorships. Or from the South American-EU integration process we haveRita Giacalone’s warnings. Dr. Giacalone, Professor of Economic History and Coordinator of the Group of Regional Integration, tells us that South American countries have entered into association agreements with with the EU out of necessity and not conviction. She conveys that integrating countries have drawn that “the EU, under the name of democracy and good governance, is imposing “a complex system of domination and management of the non Western world” and that the European project is inherently antidemocratic.